Hawaii Food Stamp Employment and Training/JOBS Conformance Demonstration: Cost Evaluation Final Report.

Autor/inn/en	Norris, Dave N.; King, Christopher T.
Institution	Texas Univ., Austin. Center for the Study of Human Resources.
Titel	Hawaii Food Stamp Employment and Training/JOBS Conformance Demonstration: Cost Evaluation Final Report.
Quelle	(1997), (38 Seiten) PDF als Volltext kostenfreie Datei Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Monographie
Schlagwörter	Quantitative Daten; Adult Education; Ancillary School Services; Comparative Analysis; Cost Effectiveness; Demonstration Programs; Economically Disadvantaged; Employment Programs; Expenditure per Student; Federal Legislation; Job Training; Program Costs; Program Effectiveness; Program Evaluation; State Programs; Statewide Planning; Tables (Data); Welfare Recipients; Welfare Services; Hawaii + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Adult; Adults; Education; Adult basic education; Adult training; Erwachsenenbildung; Kosten-Nutzen-Analyse; Kosten-Nutzen-Denken; Employment program; Employment programme; Employment programmes; Beschäftigungsprogramm; Bundesrecht; Berufsqualifizierender Bildungsgang; Programme evaluation; Programmevaluation; Regierungsprogramm; Planwirtschaft; Tabelle; Sozialhilfeempfänger; Sozialhilfeempfängerin; Fürsorgeeinrichtung
Abstract	An evaluation was conducted of the Hawaii Food Stamp Employment and Training (FSE&T)/Job Opportunities and Basic Skills Program Conformance Demonstration, known as PRIDE (Positive Response in Developing Employment). The cost component determined impact of the demonstration on costs of administering and providing activity components and support services to FSE&T participants. The analysis addressed Hawaii FSE&T program costs statewide, in the demonstration site on Oahu, and in the comparison site on Hawaii. Findings indicated that the total costs of the program on Oahu quadrupled from the baseline to the demonstration period. The costs of the program in the comparison site doubled. The increase in FSE&T expenditures statewide was also very large. Total costs almost tripled from the baseline to the demonstration period; most was due to the expenditures in the PRIDE program. Distribution of costs in the two sites was similar. Direct service delivery costs accounted for 75-80 percent of total costs in each site. Support services accounted for a bigger share in the comparison site, administrative services for a larger share in the demonstration site. At the state level, administrative costs made up a larger share and direct delivery costs made up a smaller share of costs. The primary source of the increased expenditures in the demonstration site was direct service delivery costs. (Cost data tables are appended.) (YLB)
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC